When Does X-4 Come Out?: X-Men 3 dissapointing end to a triliogy

As one of the most anticipated films (and sequels) of the summer, X-Men 3: The Last Stand, was somewhat of a let down. Not that it was a horrible film, because it was actually quite good. But as the ending of the epic triliogy of one of the greatest comic book stories of all time, it was unsatisfactory.

While Bryan Singer was down under shooting Superman Returns, (and apparently helping Peter Jackson shoot King Kong...) Brett Ratner became the new X-director. Singer, who's fame as a director took off after Usual Suspects, grew before our eyes as a director. The difference between X-Men and X-Men 2: X-Men United was wonderful to witness. The second one seemed to work out the flaws of the first one, and was a much stronger, powerful and more enjoyable piece of film. As an X-fan, I could not wait to see how much better still the third movie was. Unfortunately, Rush Hour director, Ratner, just did not seem ready to take on such an enormous project.

The second X-movie's epic power was incredible. Looking at how triliogies generally go, the first one introduces the characters, the second deals with a major conflict, and the third swells up into a culminating moment where all ends are tied and the audience is left feeling satisfied and perhaps a little teary eyed. X-2 had such a driving force, that no doubt the third one would continue is momentum. This is where Ratner just did not make the grade. His use of overdramatics tried to pull the audience in (Hugh Jackman's final Wolverine moment of, and I quote, "Noooooooooooo!) This is a perfect example of a director trying too hard to make an epic finale and not letting the story tell itself.

There were so many new characters introduced that it almost seemed at points like a side show act. Some mutants seemed like they were just showing off what visual effects could do now, or just to wow the audiences. The biggest upset as far as characters go was the almost non-existant Angel, played by Six Feet Under's Ben Foster. He is in the trailer more than he's in the movie. There was an incredibly interesting opening shot of him as a boy, and a great subplot with him and his father, which was unfortunately only in about the first 2 minutes and the last two minutes of the movie. He seemed to serve no other purpose than to tear a few father-son heart strings. The whole subplot unfortunately was unecessarily and quite annoyingly done.

Some of the characters were wonderful, however. There was of course, Beast, played by television brainiac Kelsey Grammar. His character was one of the most enjoyable points in the film. He was witty and very real- Beast, also known as Dr. Hank McCoy, was actually sort of a government liason to the mutant world. He sat with the president and other officials and helped with difficult decisions. It was sort of a slap in the face to the biggoted mutant-hating world of humans. (He was only blue and furry, of course... we all know that someone black or gay or Muslim could never hold an official position such as that. This is only fiction............. and I do hope you realize my cynical sarcasm there.) This film, more so than the other films, brought out the real issue that has been woven into X-stories for years: civil rights. That all men, black, white, christian, atheist, jewish, muslim, gay, straight or mutant, are people, with the same capacity as any other human being. It also pointed out that not every group of people is good or evil. The mutants break into two distinctive groups in this film: the rebels, who plan on destroying those who wish to destroy them, and the X-Men, who stand up against the rebel mutants to protect their fellow humans. This one also had much more underlying homosexual themes: a "cure" to this "disease" they call "mutation." Very powerful stuff.

Social themes aside, there was one other incredible aspect about this film: Jean Grey, played once again brilliantly by Famke Janssen. I will not give too much away (I'm sure you figured out she is alive from the trailers, or any of you who have read the comics, OR any of you who know that her mutant name is Pheonix,) but her part in the film is great.

So, standing on its own, this is a great, enjoyable film. However, the brilliant ending to a three-part epic it is not. Plus, with the open-ending and hidden ending (stay after the credits!) there is no possible way this can be the end. There is a Wolverine movie announced, but sadly, no other X-films. Definately go see this one if you are a fan at all of the X-franchise. Do see the other two movies first if you have not seen them at all. You may want to rewatch the first two before hand, but it is not necessary. A very enjoyable film.

Overall Grade: B (on its own) C (as the ending of a triliogy)

Stepford Wives Meets Animal Farm: Hedge an all around triumph sewn tightly with social commentary

Directed by Tim Johnson (Antz and Sinbad) and first time director Karey Kirkpatrick (the writer of Chicken Run,) Over the Hedge is hands down THE BEST animated film of the year!

Not that it had much to beat. Ice Age 2, Curious George and the sure-to-be-a-cult-inside-joke-classic-in-some-small-town, Doogal. But this film has been compared to recent animated hits such as Madagascar and Finding Nemo.

I first heard about this film when I saw an early trailer for it with Steve Carrell. Haven recently peed my pants from 40 Year Old Virgin, the idea of an animated Carrell was irresitable. The more I saw, the more I loved. Shatner doing a Shatner impersonation, Eugene Levy and Catherine O'Hara coupled together again, and Allison Janney to boot! This film had a ridiculous cast, and I was not let down at all by their performances. There was only one complaint I had in that department. Oddly enough, singer Avril Lavigne played William Shatner's (Ozzie's) daughter Heather. There was a very forgettable side story with the two of them, which I found very uneccessary. I wouldn't have minded it as much if I didn't have the unnerving feeling that Lavigne's character's screen time replaced what could have been brilliant comedy of O'Hara and Levy. O'Hara, who plays the mother porcupine, Penny, hardly has any lines. Being quite the fan of the Christopher Guest movies, I longed for their witty banter that has worked so well in other films. Oh well, let's hope there are deleted scenes.

Hedge is about a hungry raccoon RJ (Bruce Willis) who angers a hybernating bear (Nick Nolte) and is forced to replace a year's worth of food. He relies on a "family" of quirky animals who accept him as one of their own. These animals wake up from hibernation to find that most of their forest has given way to Suburbia, complete will cell-phone-while-driving-their-SUVs-and-drinking-coffee-lattes-and-eating-their-fake-cheese-flavored-chips Americans. Adults will appreciate humor and references (better catch up on your Citizen Kane quotes) that does not classify itself as ADULT HUMOR (except maybe for the private-licking and the arbitrary "squirrel's nuts" joke.)

Unlike Ice Age 2, this film does not shove dirty humor down your throats, nor does it sugar coat the world like the pre-school Curious George. This film has humor and situations that EVERYONE can enjoy. And the animation is absolutely incredible. It is so real- but still very cartooney. Send your kids, go with your kids, or go by yourself! Whoever you go see it with, definately go see it in theatres. This is a great summer movie!!

Overall Grade: A

So Dramatic The Con of Man: Da Vinci unrightfully scorned, but far from a masterpiece

Despite the fact that advertisements for the Da Vinci Code have lined streets, malls and subways for the past month, the publicity for this movie that was most effective was undoubtedly thanks to the Catholic Church. Religion has fascinated people since the beginning of time, and for some reason, the idea of religious conspiracy has a far more intriguing grasp on people than religious faith. Not to mention that this film is based on a book that is the adult equivalent of Harry Potter. It is no wonder that film audience around the world flocked to this movie, disregarding the horrendous reviews it received from critics.

Before I go any further, I must say that I did read the book. I was completely enthralled by it, and was on the edge of my seat. Although, I do appreciate it as a piece of fiction (much like the Bible itself.) My biggest concern going into the film was what they were going to cut. Not that I minded one less puzzle or a missing line, but I just was a little wary that audiences would be able to follow it if they had not read it. After seeing the film with someone who had not read it, I realized that although I needed to fill him in on tiny aspects, he seemed to get the general gist of it. I wish they had explained some things slightly more (for instance, they show those shocking images of the ritual that Sophie, played by Audrey Tautou, walks in on, but never really explain what's going on.) If you are interested at all in the religious mythology and the conspiracy, I definitely recommend you read the book first. You can enjoy the movie for what it is without reading it.

That being said, let's move on.

Director Ron Howard did an odd job of starting the story off. Similar to the book, the film starts out with the murder of Jacques Sauniere (John-Pierre Marielle), which is fine, but the events that follow seem extremely awkward. Everything is spun quickly into this desperately overdramatic sequence of events. There was such a heavy weight given to the things they were talking about, but it was not giving that same meaning to the audience. We could tell that yes, these things were very important to these people on screen... but we did not feel this importance.

The performances were sub-par. Tom Hanks as the lead role of writer Robert Langdon was definitely miscast. He played the part as extremely dull, which in turn made points of the film extremely dull. And one thing that should have been completely removed was his claustrophobia. Howard tried to use it as a character builder by adding a childhood story to it, but in fact, it made it corny and unnecessary. Tautou was fine. Unfortunately, her character was not given much. The family aspect of the book which was such a big part, did not carry over to the film, and so it seemed much of what made Sophie's character interesting was left out. Ian McKellen, although not at all how I pictured this character, played grail historian Sir Leigh Teabing. He definitely was one of the more interesting parts of the movie. And I must say that I have never disliked Jean Reno, who plays Captain Fache, and I continue to agree with my belief. (I even liked him in Pink Panther.)

Although far from the fictional "masterpiece" that Dan Brown's novel has come to be, this film definitely did not deserve the scorn it got from all the critics. It is an interesting film, and definitely worth seeing. It is a nice change of pace from the lighthearted comedies and blockbuster action movies the summer will be jam packed with. There were some disappointing changes made from the book (the fate of Bishop Aringarosa, played by Alfred Molina, and the odd Priory ending,) but readers and non-readers alike can enjoy this film. I definitely recommend seeing it in theatres if you are really excited about it, but be prepared to sit for a long time.

Overall Grade: B-

From the Latin Word Meaning "Warm and Fuzzy": Akeelah will leave you spellbound

If I had Akeelah's vocabulary, I'm sure I could come up with a word to describe this film. Director Doug Atchison, who oddly also directed The Pornographer, wrote this family film about a young girl growing up in a poor community in southern L.A. where being smart was definately not cool. Akeelah, played by Keke Palmer, who unfortunately made her screen debut in Barbershop 2, is an eleven year old girl who finds herself easily getting 100's on all her spelling tests and winning the high scores at Scrabble effortlessly, while her classmates fail without caring. The school principal, played by Curtis Armstrong ("Booger" from Revenge of the Nerds... that's right, her principal is Booger...) finally convinces her to enter into the school spelling bee. From there, she takes an inspirational journey that will have you feeling happy, hopeful, and actually a little giddy (without feeling corny.)

Feel-good family films are so hard to come by now. Everything has to be the depressing hard truth or the dirty comedy. Watching this film, I almost felt like a kid again, remembering all those underdog movies I grew up on. It's fun, and suspenseful (think of how edge of your seat the documentary Spellbound was.) Best of all, it promotes positive messages from studying, to family and community.

Now let's get past all this seemingly sugar-coated stuff. I hate corny, cheesy humor that film makers find it so necessary to put in kids movies nowadays. Appparently, humor can either be ridiculously dumb or dirty and foul. This movie definately proved that theory wrong. I was laughing quite a bit. Not only was I laughing, but I actually found myself unable to stop smiling when the movie ended. Granted, I felt like a dork, but those who I saw it with were doing the same thing.

Now, some may say it's feel-goodness is a major flaw, but I say this is not so! If every single film that came out was like this, then yes, it would be a bit much. But these genuinely good, inspirational FAMILY films are so hard to come by. And think about it: it's a FAMILY film. One that you would take your grandmother and your 4 year old cousin to. This is not a film that's meant for drinking night with the guys. Once you get past the fact that Starbucks produced it, you can see what a gem this little movie is. Plus, Laurence Fishbourne is in (and produced) it, so you can make Matrix references if you get bored. (Also, an adorable hispanic kid you'll fall in love with- J.R. Villarreal- and wonderful Asian stereotypes.) DEFINATELY go see this film if you have kids, know kids, or were a kid once yourself.
Overall Grade: A